Thu.
Change my location 
|
|
Article History There are updates to this article.
SAN FRANCISCO (Map, News) - One city supervisor is calling for more information about San Francisco’s Patrol Special, a little known subset of the police department that makes armed security officers available for hire.
The force, which numbers about 25 officers, has been a part of the City Charter since 1932 and has been hired by merchants seeking protection.
Critics say the officers are too similar to sworn police officers, although they do not have the same arrest or report-writing powers, nor do they receive the same comprehensive training given to the police.
On Tuesday, Supervisor Bevan Dufty called on the Controller’s Office to study the the effectiveness of the organization as a whole.
“The public sees someone in a blue uniform and they think they’re a cop, but they have entirely different functions,” Dufty said. “We just have to look where they fit in to an overall policing strategy.”
 Not ranked |
 EMAIL ME THIS STORY |
ARTICLE HISTORY 
Comments from Examiner Readers
5:13 PM MST on Mon., Jun. 9, 2008 re: "Fong aims to test her shooting skills"
Report as inappropriate
1:12 PM MST on Thu., Jun. 5, 2008
re: "Fong aims to test her shooting skills"
Report as inappropriate
11:01 PM MST on Wed., Jun. 4, 2008
re: "Fong aims to test her shooting skills"
Report as inappropriate
5:50 PM MST on Wed., Jun. 4, 2008
re: "Fong aims to test her shooting skills"
Report as inappropriate
12:58 PM MST on Wed., Jun. 4, 2008
re: "Fong aims to test her shooting skills"
Report as inappropriate
8:50 AM MST on Thu., Apr. 24, 2008
re: "Police academy in city’s budget cross hairs"
Report as inappropriate
7:47 PM MST on Tue., Apr. 22, 2008
re: "Police academy in city’s budget cross hairs"
Report as inappropriate
1:10 PM MST on Tue., Apr. 22, 2008
re: "Police academy in city’s budget cross hairs"
Report as inappropriate
11:37 AM MST on Mon., Apr. 21, 2008
re: "Police academy in city’s budget cross hairs"
Report as inappropriate
7:54 PM MST on Thu., Feb. 14, 2008
re: "Suspects, body in homicide case slipped through cracks"
Report as inappropriate
5:49 PM MST on Thu., Feb. 14, 2008
re: "Suspects, body in homicide case slipped through cracks"
Report as inappropriate
No Suprised said:
Democrats like Fong believe there are two sets of rules. One for me and one for thee. Only the little people have to follow department rules, right?
2 agree | 0 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Fong represents the exact foundation that the department has been known for years prior. It is so political....it borderlines, "corruption". I think it is a true justice to have Officer Cohen speak out and tell the truth of why biases occurrs at every level. Sadly, being "chief of police", one would hope that the command staff was informed, or the range master should have told her staff. But as you can clearly see, it takes an bitter-insider to point the finger at his boss, where no one else would.......fearing retaliation from the top down. I hope that her staff would stop 'stonewalling' all the issues going on and speak up to what is fair and just. Oh yeah, then again, we are talking about SFPD. I wonder if the Mayor is going to hold a press conference, what a waste of citizen's time and money!! The Police Commission should opt for her to resign asap, and retire. Why should Fong continue to be stomped on, when she's down. Fong needs to go...Change is good.
2 agree | 0 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Heather Fong should have been disciplined for her deliberate act of not qualifying at the range for FIVE consecutive years. If a regular officer missed qualifications for FIVE years, that officer would have immediately been degunned & brought up on charges for violating department general orders. Why is Chief Fong exempt from discipline or prosecution. THen again, why is Fong carrying a gun anyway? It's not like she's going to use it to defend the citizens of San Francisco. Heather Fong is a true coward in every sense, and she's nothing more than a political puppet for Newsom. This is definitely one of the darkest day in SFPD history!
4 agree | 0 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Disappointed with SF said:
Why is it that Fong is given a pass on violating department policy by commisioner Marshall. She passes judgement on cops that violate the same rules. What a piece of crap. Why does she have thirteen member command staff. Pass some of the work to these people. I'm sure Newsom will cover this up just like he covered up the fire chief when she clobbered her husband with a heavy glass. It was a personal family issue. If it was anyone else they would have been booked. I hope this pinhead does not make it to the state capital. He might make the idiot Fong head of the Department of Justice, then the whole state will be screwed. Ah San Francisco, Bagdad by the bay.
3 agree | 0 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
This is one of the funniest stories I have read in a long time. I wonder if Cheap Leather Thong knows which end of the gun to aim down range. This is a photo opp for sure. Calamity Jane in action!!
2 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
jay kay said:
SFPD does not get 100% retirement. Get your facts straight before you post it you dumb liberal morons! If you are a "lowly patrol sergeant", they top out at $98k per year. And after 20yrs of babysitting pot smoking, inmate/criminal loving citizens of san francisco, at 3% per year retirement, which comes out to 60% of your total pay (3%X20=60percent), then you will get a pension of 58.8k per year. That is not much to live on. And yes, they DO pay for their medical after retirement! And this 3% per year formula is mandated by the state PERS (public employee retirement system). That means every firemen, corrections, and law enforcment officers get it, not just sfpd.
2 agree | 4 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
the wages, benefits, and retirement of SFPDees members is outrageous. It is my understanding, that a lowly patrol sergeant retires at approximately $100,000 a year plus free medical benefits. That's $100,000 per year plus cost of living raises. Police deserve a living wage, however, their retirement benefits are outrageous. I might add that most of SFPD lives out of San Francisco and do not patronize local business. The system needs to be changed... Retired, SFPD member
2 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
When, not if, you become a victim, where will you turn to for help? SF Police DO NOT retire at 100%. Get your facts straight!
1 agree | 4 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
The biggest waste of money is the police dept.Mr. gary Delagnes always talks about police needing more money-& overtime.I wish he would just jump off a cliff,Lots of city workers are going to lose their jobs(workers that do not earn that much money ),I wont even mention the police benefits 100% retirement. It would be nice if the police union stops holding the city hostage,Thats a true crime!!!!!!
6 agree | 8 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
As someone who knew the victim, I can assure you there was NO drug counseling going on, nor was there a drug counselor present. This person had no experience as a drug counselor and misrepresented herself (using a legitimate license) hoping to get prop 36 funding.
45 agree | 40 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
ANOTHER SFPD boo boo!
45 agree | 35 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree